It is important that the legal translator understands the different types of vocabulary he faces in the text, whether they are habitual, specialized, archaic, abstract or functional. Any type of these lexical elements requires caution, study and knowledge on the part of the translator. For example, for common words, the translator has the right to distinguish the exact meaning of these words in the legal context. He should consult specialists and analyze similar texts to find the best solution. For technical terms, he may try to understand lexical elements conceptually rather than literally translating them, or he might resort to specialized dictionaries. When translating archaic expressions, the translator must find an approximate expression in the TL or use paraphrasing. Abstract words are very sensitive and are subject to many legal interpretations in the legal context. Therefore, the legal translator should translate them verbatim and not try to disambisate them, even if this translation leads to a vague text. شرط: Condition, duration, reservation, clause (for an agreement). duvets and triplets or binomials are “a confrontation of two or three words” [38, p.
13] that are “syntactically coordinated and semantically related” [26, p. 123] as “true and correct”; “false and false” or related sentences: “by and with the agreement and advice of…” ». Arabic legal texts contain two or three words of associated meanings, sometimes synonymous or almost synonymous, related by (contract/wa – et) or (أhypertensi/aw – or). These are “binomials or polynomials”; [9, p. 138] `hendiadys` [5, p. 244]; Couplets synonyms [42, p. 62] and Koch`s “Dyadian couplets” [cf. 42, p. 62]. Dulettes and triplets appear as part of both legal Arabic and English. A number of examples of Arabic-English dubäres and triplets are given in the following table: terms have meaning only because they are part of more or less culture-specific frameworks, and a message can be totally distorted if the implicit culture-specific information or the meaning of culture-specific words or an allusion by the translator is not understood [36; P. 137].
Similarly, Legrand [30, p. 35] states that “there is no indication that the same idea necessarily generates the same idea in another culture, especially since the words inscribed are themselves different because they have been reproduced in another language.” .